Nice article--I would only say that you have every right to sound angry and shouldn't apologize for it; to the contrary, let it fly and we will embrace you for it!

The righteous become gods themselves ...

Not quite. Only righteous males become gods, gender being another integral part of pre- and post-life existence. (Like many homophobic doctrines, this one actually makes the phenomenon of transgenderism more easily explicable, at least in cultural-religious terms.) Righteous females have a much lower place in the cosmic order, one which is largely dependent on their husbands -- and it ought to go without saying that righteous unmarried women have little if any place in the Mormon afterlife. At best, righteous Mormon women may eventually become the subservient wives of gods, having frequent spirit-sex with their respective celestial husbands and bearing many, many souls to populate the universe. If traditional Christianity is patriarchal, Mormonism is the patriarchy on steroids.

Thanks, Tim. I appreciate your clarification on that. If I would have gone off on the position of womyn in general in the Mormon Church, that would have been a diatribe of it's own.

Serena,

Thanks for sharing this information and for your thoughts and personal experiences. You have every right to be angry. I, like you, am a gay mormon (I had my name removed from the Church records) and still feel bitterness toward the "party line" despite tiny steps to soften their stance. I am not one of those people who thinks that the church will change its doctrinal position on this issue in the future. I've moved on. But my family remains in the church and they have to figure out how they will love me (their brother, uncle, father, ex-husband) and reconcile that with their testimony of this church.

Congrats to you and to your mother for her ability to see past the craziness! Oh and I hope you were just exaggerating the number of church members worldwide. There are only about 12 million...let's not give them more than they deserve!

Serena, I agree with Gay Recluse: you have reason to be angry!! And we will support you.

I'm so glad your mom came around. Rather than it being a bad thing that the church is rejecting her for supporting you, maybe it will lead eventually to her finding a life path that will lead to greater happiness and acceptance for who she is individually, rather than one where she is viewed as a mere extension of her husband. I hope so.

Is Serena apologizing for being angry? When she has every right to be?

Oh, my.

Thanks for posting this. I don't think many people really know all that much about Mormonism (myself included).

I agree with Alex. I didn't know very much about Mormonism before I read this. Very illuminating, and yes, I also agree with GR: If you're angry and you know it, let it fly!

Out of curiosity, why do you find the term homosexuality dehumanizing? Do you also find heterosexuality dehumanizing, or the term sexuality for that matter?

I find most of the gay community to be in a contemptuous relationship with the clinical community, although I don't understand why. I know they have made their mistakes, which were not unique to us as a category, but at least they rectified them, unlike other spheres in which I find the gay community to be in rather good terms with.

Furthermore, I think (please bear with me, I try to avoid too many sentences starting with the egotistical "I...") that some gays and lesbians misinterpret the term's connotations. Homosexual, unlike the pejorative "queer" (which, ironically, the gay community adopts) or "faggot," is pretty neutral in and of itself; it does not have denoted description implying inferiority like the aforementioned terms. Nevertheless, we affirm the heterosexuals' notion that homosexuality is inferior when we find the term to be demeaning. Heterosexuality and homosexuality merely define our sexual attractions; they do not ascribe any moral value. Thus, I find myself comfortable with being called a homosexual because I find nothing demeaning in the description of the term; it is one aspect of who I am; and, despite the fact that this will sound incredibly tacky, I am pretty proud of it.

I take it to be the same situation as when someone uses the terms "you hit like a girl," "he looks feminine," or calling a man by a feminine version of their name in order to taunt. Perhaps because I'm one of those rare but stereotypically gay male feminists. I know that being called a girl or woman is factually inaccurate, for the genitalia in between my legs seems to say otherwise. I would find myself betraying women if I were to be offended by such taunts. It would mean I'm accepting the patriarchal description of the inferior feminine as legitimate.

Thus, we see why we shouldn't be sensitive about terms which by themselves are neutral. If someone calls me a homosexual, I'll just be amused at someone's stupid need to state the obvious. It is the derogatory terms which possess demeaning definitions that we should be rejecting, namely that favorite term "queer."

Lucrece, the term homosexuality did not exist in the English language until the late 1800's with the invention of the field of psychiatry. From the beginning, the term was used to describe a mental condition. It belongs in the same category of words as pedophilia and necrophilia. It implies that gay and lesbian people are abnormal.

As for the use of the term "queer" by many in our community, I personally find the term to be more inclusive and political than calling myself a gay woman, but I also understand many people's objection to reclaiming "queer." For me, language is all about personal preference. A good analogy would be the use of the terms Latina/o, Chicana/o, or Hispanic. Each term means something different to different people. And it's a matter of personal preference how they would describe themselves.

Homosexual is still a term that many in our community use to describe themselves. There are always regional and generational differences with language use. But for me, I do not apply that label to myself and I don't appreciate other people using the term to describe me, because it's not who I am.

I understand where you're coming from. However, just to clarify, do you find the term heterosexual to possess the same qualities you described for the term homosexual? The term was used to describe a group of people that were believed to have a mental condition, which has changed recently. The sensitivity is understandable, though; some feel it over-sexualizes who we are. However, I don't find psychiatry's involvement with it as necessarily degrading; many psychiatric studies actually deal with normal behavior, as opposed to the stereotypes and stigmas we force on the field.

To be honest, though, I prefer the term gay, euphemism and all. Homosexual has a stigma because of heterosexist and homophobic thought, I think, not because the term is inherently possessing such qualities. Since it's neutral to begin with in denotation, perhaps it's just me being capricious in wanting to reclaim it back from the homophobes.

The LDS stance on homosexuality depends on church doctrine regarding the pre-existence of gender, as well as the different and unequal destinies assigned respectively to men and women. The inferior status of women in the Mormon church isn't a separate diatribe, Serena -- it's the subtext of your post.

Serena,

A word of advice (even if you didn't ask for it). Louise Hay in her many speeches always bashed religions who made their minions guilty by asking the following questions:

1) does your religion make you feel guilty?
2) does your religion make you feel bad?
3) does your religion make you feel unhappy?
etc, etc, the questions went on for a while, each time the audience would scream yes!

Her answer was simple: there are zillions of religions out there, find another one that fits you and welcomes you!

I did it. Makes sense to me.

Tim, you're absolutely right. This post was long enough as it was without going more in depth on the gender issue. Maybe in another post . . . But yes, I agree.

Richard, I also agree with you. I left the Mormon Church in 1998. I was at BYU when Matthew Shephard was killed and that was the wake up call I needed to get out. Nowadays, I would consider myself spritual but not religious. There's a lot about Wicca and Buddhism that appeal to me. And when I feel like I need the extra charge of worshipping with others, I have a couple of different congregations that I like to visit. But I'm over being tied down to one religious body. God is everywhere and I don't have to be in a specific building to find her.

I enjoyed this post. It was very enlightening, and I hope your mom will be okay.

However, I use the term 'homosexual'. Similarly, I don't mind if someone refers to me as 'black' instead of 'African American' because they'll call me the N-word behind closed doors when they want to.

I think the beliefs of the person using the term is more important than the word itself, especially when used in a casual, un-malicious context.

Anywho, I enjoy your posts. Welcome to Bilerico! :)

Lucrece;

I think the problem with the term 'homosexual' is the '-sexual' part. The religious right uses the word 'homosexual' like a club to instill fear in the susceptible towards the LGBT community, and '-sexual' is the nail stuck into the end of that club.

By contrast, they hardly ever use the words 'gay', 'lesbian' or 'transgender' in their hate-filled, fear-mongering tracts. As a matter of fact (and I'm transgendered,) to the hate mongers, I'm a 'homosexual', too.

Serena Freewomyn, wonderful article on Mormon attitudes. I have two friends (trans) who are ex-Mormon, and my sister was a church member for several years (due to marriage) before she extracted herself from them., so what you wrote matched what I have been told about 'the church'.

I'm sorry your Mormon upbringing left you feeling hopeless to the point of feeling suicidal. Even if I am estranged from parents, I feel lucky to have had so many wonderful queer role models and a warm sense of community in contrast. Not that the negative ones didn't give me plenty of things that needed resolution before I could become the person who today so actively values the gift of being a lesbian but I had plenty of good examples and support to find my way home to my real family.

They're the people who call or e-mail when there's a big public defaming of us all like Pat Buchanan's 1992 RNC Culture War speech, who don't struggle for euphemisms to avoid calling Phyllis my wife, who would never dream of treating the two of us as anything but the primary family we are to each other. They're people who send me the local LGBT news -- and all the best gossip -- and they do their best keep me abreast of what's happening in the rest of my family, too. And that's a family the awareness of the size of which has grown huge in the last decade and a half, too, what with the Monticello Community reunions bringing long-separated branches together for those who choose to come and play!

Great information most churches use the "Hate the sin love the sinner” bit Growing up Presbyterian. I rarely heard this my folks go to a Methodist church now and yes I have heard that very phrase. But way to often it becomes “Hate the sinner to!” Now im happily BGP that’s Born again Pagan most have very few things they refer to as sinful against what you do though my own religion ASATRU tends to be a bit conservative in many areas but we are a mixed lot to be gay and open let alone trans is accepted by most especially if your also a magic user which I am as this trait has always been a part of the magic community of ASATRU. To be a non magic user you are judged on your deeds and how you behave around others not the fact you prefer the same sex.

The epidemiologic and medical terms for GLB are
MSM (men who have sex with men)
WSW
MSMW
WSWM
all of which are behaviorally based and bypass the orientation-identity issue which lies beneath the words "homosexual", "gay", "same-gender-loving", and "drunk and happy with any action, but considers themselves straight"

Serena, thanks so much for posting this -- this is incredibly informative and enlightening. And I'm sorry your mom is in such "trouble" with her congregation -- that just breaks my heart. Any progress on that front?

Blessings,
Gina

Serena,

As others have said, a very good and informative post. I feel your pain, in that when I was younger I inflicted upon myself the Southern Baptist church. Rather than providing comfort, it shamed me into hiding even more of who I am.

Like you, I have a lot of anger from the mental torture that their doctrines put me through.

The concept of sin was invented by the priests to control the lives of the people who followed them. All it has ever been is a device for control, a means of one group to exercise power over others. The religions derived from the judeo/christian/muslim god are just a way for the patriarchy to exercise its power over other people's lives.It was then, and is now just a political framework with which to exercise authority over others.

Religion is just another tool of the Man, Fight the power sister!

(The worst quote, however, from this tome comes from Elder Wickman, who claims:

Gratefully, the answer is that same-gender attraction did not exist in the pre-earth life and neither will it exist in the next life. It is a circumstance that for whatever reason or reasons seems to apply right now in mortality, in this nano-second of our eternal existence.

The good news for somebody who is struggling with same-gender attraction is this: 1) It is that ‘I’m not stuck with it forever.’ It’s just now. Admittedly, for each one of us, it’s hard to look beyond the ‘now’ sometimes. But nonetheless, if you see mortality as now, it’s only during this season.)

Any questions why there is a rash of teens killing themselves with this kind of logic? Any questions return missionaries who have not been "cured" through their service to the Church have left it, to either kill themselves or go flying out of the closet or worse yet, go on the down low and bring STD's and HIV/AIDS into their marriages?

According to Mormon Lore, the only difference between the spirit that inhabits our bodies today and the one that was with G_d in the begining is that we lost the memory of our time with G_d. If this is correct doctrine, then...there had to be some Gay, Lesbian, Bi and Trans spirits running around. Crazy part is these same spirits are eternal. They are as they are in personality, trait, behavior and thought.

This brings up the subject why LDS Apologists think it is wrong to question G_d, or call him to Repentance? If it was Good enough for Abraham or Jacob, why isn't it good enough for the LDS Prophet today? If prophets in the past would ask G_d the same question over and over again, why then, oh why can't they do it today?